It does not look like electricity prices are set to fall. In fact quite the reverse. Idealists never consider the price, it is net zero and bust! What is not added to the eye-watering bill is the cost of lost jobs as industries close or move abroad. The last government did not cover themselves in glory, but I think voters can now see (too late) that this lot are far worse.
Grid Upgrade Costs Could Soar 500% | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
The EU has issued a regulation stipulating that, from January 1, 2027, methane emissions from the extraction, processing, and transport of crude oil and natural gas must be reduced for climate protection reasons. This is intended to apply not only in Europe but also to non-European producing countries.
The strict rules apply to importers, who must prove that these new EU standards are met in the producing countries. While importers like SEFE, Uniper, and Shell warn that “a significant portion of the global gas supply will de facto be non-compliant” and that substantial supply shortages could occur, the EU intends to enforce its regulation with exorbitant fines of up to 20 percent of annual turnover. On June 24, the US, Qatar, Nigeria, and Algeria, in a joint letter to the EU Commission, demanded changes to the import rules, otherwise Europe would face massive supply risks in the middle of January 2027. After all, 43% of natural gas consumption in Europe is affected. US Energy Secretary Chris Wright called the rules “crazy.” The US is prepared to supply Europe, but not under these conditions.
Minister Reiche rightly advocated for a suspension of the regulation at the EU level. Her SPD colleague, Environment Minister Schneider, spoke on behalf of the federal government in favor of maintaining the EU regulation and publicly criticized his ministerial colleague for her initiative.
Germany obtains only 10-13% of its natural gas via its much-lauded LNG terminals. However, approximately 40% of its natural gas comes from the Netherlands and Belgium, where it is landed as LNG and transported to Germany via pipelines. It is rarely discussed that Belgium obtains 40% of its LNG imports from Russia via Zeebrugge, as does the Netherlands with 13% of its imports. Therefore, we are still indirectly receiving significant quantities of Russian gas. France imports a third of its LNG from Russia (see the following graphic: Netherlands in yellow, Belgium in purple, France in blue, source: IEEAE LNG Tracker). According to EU plans, these imports are to be phased out beginning January 1, 2027. This will likely result in a trend towards higher prices.
German Gas Storage Facilities: Filling Them Will Be Difficult
On that baking Tuesday, June 23rd, we came close to suffering an event as dramatic as the blackout that occurred in Spain and Portugal in 2025 when trains stopped, industry and commerce were suspended, and hospitals were forced to switch to emergency backup supplies to prevent patients from dying.
Control room engineers at the National Energy System Operator (Neso) the little-known government body responsible for balancing Britain's electricity supply and demand, were panicking. The grid's frequency had destabilised and dropped below Neso's strict operating limit, threatening widespread blackouts.
As Britain moves towards a carbon-free electricity system, around 80 per cent of generation is expected to come from wind and solar. The greater the share supplied by weather-dependent sources, the smaller the proportion of the system that grid operators can directly control when balancing supply and demand.
Marine microbes play a central role in how carbon moves through the ocean. Some use sunlight to turn carbon dioxide into organic matter. Others consume that material and release carbon back into the water.
Scientists unlock the secret role of ocean microbes in Earth's climate - The Brighter Side of News
It would appear from this article that the Aussies are in a similar position to the UK in that their government is sticking with using renewables, even though they must know that they are unreliable and expensive. They are heading for blackouts and missing out on industries that use large quantities of electricity.
The claim about 2,700 deaths comes from a study by Imperial College, which, it turns out, didn’t count any actual deaths at all.
Rather, it was a piece of statistical modelling which tried to estimate the number of deaths which might have occurred during the heatwave, based on the temperatures recorded over the past weeks and patterns of excess mortality seen during previous hot spells.
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) records actual deaths for every week of the year and compares them with the number of people who have died in the same week in recent years. If more people have died this year than the average of the past five years, then that difference is labelled ‘excess mortality’.
So, what does the real-world data say for this year? In the week ending May 31, which included the first heatwave when a record temperature of 35.1C (95.2F) was reached in west London, the UKHSA reports that it detected ‘no signal of high mortality above the baseline’.
Read it all in Yesterday's Mail. Link:
The ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which has been endorsed by the Government, declared that states had a binding obligation to limit greenhouse gas emissions, to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels and to stop exploration or production of crude oil, gas and other fossil fuels.
Experts say that leaves the UK open to litigation from poorer countries.
Writing in today's Mail on Sunday, Ms Badenoch says that Energy Secretary Ed Miliband would 'be delighted' that 'we wouldn't be able to further exploit our natural resources in the North Sea, and we'd be on the hook for trillions of pounds in reparations to developing countries for the 'damage suffered' by historic carbon emissions'.
The UK is currently the only member of the United Nations Security Council to accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the ICJ, which is based in The Hague.
The case has similarities with the Chagos Islands.
In a continuation of yesterday's post I am going to quote another section of Claire Coutinho's speech in the debate on the next round of CO2 reductions (which were approved by the Labour Government).
Here is the quote:
"The unelected Climate Change Committee is using taxpayers’ funds to try to silence elected representatives rather than focusing on getting its costings right. Everybody in this House should think that is shameful. If the committee was wrong by a factor of three on offshore wind—something that we have better evidence for than pretty much anything else in the market—how can we trust any of the rest of its analysis?
Let us look at some of the committee’s claims. It claims that a low-carbon electricity supply is “cheaper per unit” than high-carbon electricity. Well, if your numbers are out by a factor of three, perhaps you might think that. It also says that
“most businesses will not be…affected by Net Zero”,
particularly in the services sector. How does it justify that? Let me assure the House, if net zero blocks the advance of AI in this country, that will have a catastrophic impact on our services sector. Here is another claim:
“a reduction in meat…and dairy”
will mean a healthier diet. Who are they to tell us what to eat and to give us nutritional advice? The committee makes claim after claim and sweeping statement after sweeping statement with nobody holding it accountable. Yet this advice—this target—will affect almost every part of normal life.
Hon. Members may argue that we need strict climate targets to provide certainty for jobs—that is what the Minister just said—but that is nonsense. The country doing the best at creating clean tech jobs is China, which is now the world’s largest polluter. Hon. Members may also say that this is about our moral duty to fix climate change, but I will remind them that every time a British factory shuts here, where we have some of the cleanest electricity in the world, and we import those same goods back from coal-powered China, we are not helping climate change; instead, we are increasing global emissions. Before Labour Members get on their high horse, I will remind them that the Conservatives are the only party to call for the measurement of the offshoring of emissions. Labour does not want to know because it does not care".
Both the tone and content of this speech indicate a clear shift in the policy of the Conservative opposition compared to their stance when in government. It is welcome, but frustratingly it is too late to change the direction of the new government. If only this transformation had occurred before the election.
On the 24th June a debate took place in parliament to discuss the latest CO2 cuts proposed by the Labour Government.
The Conservative opposition spokesman, Claire Coutinho pointed out that "The Climate Change Committee said that offshore wind would cost £38 per megawatt-hour, but contracts were being signed by their Secretary of State for £82 per megawatt-hour, suggesting that something was clearly going very wrong on a key input for the exact target that we are voting on today."
She then went on to say, "When I wrote to the Climate Change Committee asking it to look at this matter, it sent me a dismissive reply. So I wrote about it in a newspaper. What did the committee do? It reported me—a democratically elected politician—under the Independent Press Standards Organisation editors’ code and tried to get me to remove my opinion. I did not. Just a few months later, the Government updated their own costings, not to £80 per megawatt-hour or even to £90 per megawatt-hour, but to over £100 per megawatt-hour. That is the Minister’s own figure. That means that not only was I right, but offshore wind was now predicted to cost three times what the Climate Change Committee had said."
I went to see this film narrated by Chris Packham. It is a follow-up to this:
Yet Another Climate Activist Masquerading as an Economist - Watts Up With That?
This film is being shown to local audiences around the country to build support to demand that a primetime televised emergency briefing on climate be broadcast. The film consists of a series of short exerts from speeches given by a series of 'experts' on various aspects of the effects of climate change and nature, following each one a small panel tells Packham of their reaction ranging from disgust to amazement. Jennifer Saunders use of foul language was noted, while in another group Deborah Meaden was too easily persuaded of the economic advantage of delivering net zero as soon as possible. A little more scrutiny would seem more convincing.
The audience at my event appeared to consist of those who were already a member of one of the host organisations along with a smattering of local councilors. I felt that the cost of net zero was glossed over while the benefits were talked up. We need to have a more highly scrutinised debate with more honesty about the cost of net zero. We all want clean rivers, no sewage outfalls, but when you ask people how much they are willing to pay it becomes a different story.
|
In contrast to our own Met Office's poor standards, the USA has set up a set of first class weather stations to truly capture any changes to the climate. This report explains:
This piece explains why the electricity costs will not be coming down in the next decade.
A few weeks ago I was invited to visit a new weather station in the New Forest. I was allowed to take a few photos and I passed the information on to my friend Ray Sanders who is carrying out a review of all UK stations. Here is his review:
Bisterne – The motivations behind new weather station locations. | Tallbloke's Talkshop
Did anyone believe Ed Miliband would cut the costs of electricity? Of course not! So here's the truth:
One Nation are now the Party of the workers, and Labor the party of wealth and academics « JoNova
At last an admission that renewables cannot provide the reliable electricity that the country needs. A pity that the government did not realise this a few years ago.
A Polish-led consortium has unveiled plans to build 14 nuclear reactors across Britain as part of a £35billion investment designed to boost the country's electricity supply.
SGE, the Warsaw-headquartered group behind the proposal, said the reactors would generate enough electricity to power around eight million homes within eight years.
Polish consortium unveils £35billion plan to build 14 nuclear reactors across Britain
Take a look at all the state records in the USA and you can see that most of them were back in the 1930's or even earlier.
They’ve Forgotten How Hot It Was in The Past! | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
The last few days heatwave in the UK has caused a lot of problems for our power supply according to this article:
How Late June's Heatwave Melted Britain's Power Network - Climate Change Dispatch
